get_ftp_port

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states 'Get the FTP server port number' and does not mention that it is a read-only operation, potential return format, error conditions, or any platform-specific nuances. This is minimal and lacks transparency beyond the literal verb.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise for a simple getter, though it could arguably include a bit more context without sacrificing clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simplicity of the tool (zero parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It identifies the action and resource but lacks any additional context such as what constitutes the 'FTP server', whether the port is configurable, or how the result should be interpreted. It is sufficient for a basic retrieve operation but leaves some gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema is an empty object. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description does not need to explain parameter behavior. It adds no parameter semantics, but none are required.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves the FTP server port number using a specific verb ('Get') and resource. It is unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like list_ftp_accounts or get_mysql_server_info.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool, prerequisites, or alternatives. The description simply states the action without explaining typical scenarios or why one would call it, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.